Engaging Immigrants in Early Psychosis Treatment: A Clinical Challenge
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study compared engagement in treatment and medication adherence of immigrants and nonimmigrants in early intervention services for persons with first-episode psychosis. METHODS: This two-year longitudinal prospective cohort study recruited patients with first-episode psychosis who were entering early intervention services in Montreal, Canada (N=223). Data on sociodemographic characteristics, symptoms, and social functioning were collected annually. RESULTS: At two years, immigrants had more than three times the odds of attrition than nonimmigrants after the analysis controlled for potential confounding factors (first-generation immigrants: odds ratio [OR]=3.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.01-9.57, p=.049); second-generation immigrants: OR=3.65, CI=1.07-12.50, p=.039). Medication adherence was similar among those who remained in the programs. CONCLUSIONS: During the two years after entering a program for first-episode psychosis, immigrants were more likely than nonimmigrants to disengage from treatment. Further research is warranted to understand this phenomenon and to improve the ability of services to engage immigrants with first-episode psychosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it